Can a vampire use multiple "attempt to block" effects?

Ankha wrote: "Blocking minion" and "minion attempting to block" are the same. Check the rulebook glossary: "Blocking Minion: The minion currently attempting to block an action, or the minion who has successfully blocked the current action."

Thanks. I had forgotten that we could use those terms interchangeably. It feels a little awkward, but I guess the phrase "the minion attempting to block" is rather cumbersome if used repeatedly.

Ankha wrote:
The rulebook says:
- [The Methuselahs] may use their ready unlocked minions to attempt to block the action
- [The action] can be blocked by the acting Methuselah's prey or predator
- If one attempt to block fails, another can be made as often as the blocking Methuselah wishes. Once a Methuselah decides not to make any further attempts to block, that decision is final.

Nothing says here that attempts must be made one by one. One could say that they have multiple ongoing block attempts. But anyway, at some point, the defending player has to declare that her minion B is attempting to block, or "decide" that she's not making "any further attempts to block".

That's what the Detailed Play Summary tries to outline.

The question is: since you declare at some point that B attempts to block, is it logical to declare a block attempt during the same block attempt, or is it more logical to handle block attempts one by one? LSJ's ruling says both, because he avoids the "declare" part: "You may attempt to block while attempting to block." He considers that it's the same block attempt, because it's the same minion.

In my opinion it would be logical to allow a second "wakes/untaps and attempts to block" cards to be played by same minion during a single blocking attempt because:

The second card does not contradict the first one. First wake forces the minion to attempt to block. Second wake is not trying to make the minion to do something OTHER than block, So the second "attempt to block" should simply be redundant. There is no logical contradiction and thus the second wake should be allowed to be played in my opinion.

The idea of forcing blocking attempts to be resolved one at a time can create problems with both overcomplicating the rules (as exemplified by posts in this thread) and making rules difficult to understand by beginners. If blocking attempts are redundant, I believe most blocking situations would be simple to handle.

This rule may allow players to cycle cards during a blocking attempt slightly easier, but most cards that I can think of already have an in-built restriction or penalty that discourages/prevents multiples to be played during a single block attempt. Qui vive can only be played once per minion per turn. Wake with evenings freshness is not replaced. Eluding the arms of morpheus costs blood, Black sunrise untaps the minion and is only playable by a tapped vampire, and so on. I dont see that this rule would "break things".

This whole thing is a bit of a "glass is half full /half empty" thing. If something is not explicitly forbidden, is it allowed? If something is not explicitly allowed, is it forbidden? I personally belong in the "if something is not explicitly forbidden, it is allowed" camp. This way, rules questions tend to be simpler, more intuitive and easier to handle.

"Do you believe in the power of the night?
If you want to go with me, refuse the light"
- Blutengel, Soultaker

Based on LSJ's ruling,
Based on agzocgud's comment about leaving more freedom to block rather than restricting options arbitrarily,
I revert my previous ruling.

The rulebook will be updated this way:

1. Who May Attempt to Block: If the action targets one or more other Methuselahs (or things controlled by other Methuselahs), then the action is called directed, and only the Methuselahs who are targeted (or control the targets) may use their ready unlocked minions to attempt to block the action (going clockwise from the acting Methuselah, as usual). If the action is not directed at another Methuselah (or at something controlled by another Methuselah), then the action is called undirected and can be blocked by the acting Methuselah's prey or predator, with the prey getting the first opportunity to block. A minion can attempt to block as long as another minion is not already blocking. If one attempt to block fails, another can be made as often as the blocking Methuselah wishes. Once a Methuselah decides not to make any further attempts to block, that decision is final. As a convenience, when a card describes an action that is typically directed at another Methuselah, the card's text will usually include a symbol as a reminder that the action is typically directed. Remember, political actions are always undirected.

Note that moving past the block attempts (when all Methuselahs have declined to block) is an effect and so allows the acting Methuselah (and others) to play more cards and effects."

This covers the "nothing prevents me from blocking with two minions at a time" and clarifies the OP question: minions can play cards that make them "attempt to block" when they are already attempting to block.

Ankha wrote: And "attempting to block" and "blocking" are the same (or two different views of the same thing).

Sorry Ankha, but you are incorrect there. Attempting to block is the phase before blocks occur, after block declarations are made, and is contiguous with making block declarations. A blocking minion is one who has successfully blocked an action. Not the same at all.

Blooded Sand wrote: Sorry Ankha, but you are incorrect there. Attempting to block is the phase before blocks occur, after block declarations are made, and is contiguous with making block declarations. A blocking minion is one who has successfully blocked an action. Not the same at all.

Sorry Blooded Sand, but you are incorrect there. The term "blocking minion" includes one who is currently attempting to block.

From the Rules Glossary in the rulebook (which has already been quoted in this thread):

Blocking Minion: The minion currently attempting to block an action, or the minion who has successfully blocked the current action.

See also:

Elder Impersonation, which does not require the target to be successfully blocking:

Only usable when a minion attempts to block. The attempt fails (do not tap that blocking minion). That minion cannot attempt to block this action again.

Crocodile's Tongue, which does not require the target to be successfully blocking:

Only usable when an ally or a younger vampire attempts to block. That block is canceled (the minion is not tapped). The blocking minion's controller cannot attempt to block this action again. The blocking minion can cancel this card by burning a blood or life.

Blooded Sand wrote: Sorry Ankha, but you are incorrect there. Attempting to block is the phase before blocks occur, after block declarations are made, and is contiguous with making block declarations. A blocking minion is one who has successfully blocked an action. Not the same at all.

Sorry Blooded Sand, but you are incorrect there. The term "blocking minion" includes one who is currently attempting to block.

You're both correct. That is, until the rulebook is rewritten so that glossary definitions don't contradict the main text.